What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Fading Fast]

The most recent Woody Allen film, A Rainy Day in New York, on Prime. I cringed through most of it.

It's a strong contender for his worst film ever, with yet more weakened replays of plots and characters that were handled far better in his earlier works: Super-rich New Yorkers (the protagonist's nickname is Gatsby, oy), troubled film directors, beautiful young muses, sequences shot at NYC landmarks like the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Delacorte Clock, classic jazz soundtrack, eccentric young people who never look at their phones and unbelievably idolize the past almost exactly like a screenwriter born in 1930 does, another unbelievable magical girlfriend replacement ending, the damn Carlysle Hotel bar again...

There was exactly one scene that wasn't a total loss, where the brilliant-but-eccentric Upper East Side-scion protagonist (Timothee Chalomet, seeming to have wandered in from a Whit Stillman film) gets a dressing down from his imperious mother (the great Cherry Jones) that really shakes him up.

Apart from that, this film is so lame that it actually makes his one-star efforts of the last decade look better. I can't even recommend it for Allen completists, it's just depressing. He really ought to retire, though I see he's already got another film completed...

Quietly removed from too-be-watched list. Thank you.

 

[Fading Fast]

A Damsel in Distress from 1937 with Fred Astaire, Joan Fontaine, George Burns and Gracie Allen


Sign: Do Not Finger Art Objects.

Gracie Allen: Well I don't blame Art, if I was Art, I'd object too.

Even under the code, stuff slipped by the censors.


Overall, I like Fred Astaire movies, but each one is a high-wire act betting that the magic and whimsy and dancing will overcome the silly plots, unbelievable situations and wash-rinse-repeat storylines. All that gets harder to do without, as in A Damsel in Distress, Ginger Rogers or a co-star of equal dancing talent.

To make up for the missing Ms. Rogers, Damsel has the comedy team of George Burns and Gracie Allen, whom I've always kept at arm's length. But to be fair, they are pretty good here filling in Rogers' gap. (Any comment Gracie?)

Also filling in for Rogers is Joan Fontaine looking insanely cute and doing her best, but she's no dancer. In the one number she does with Astaire - that there is only one duet says it all - she almost looks pained, as most humans would dancing opposite Fred freakin' Astaire on screen.

Burns and Allen have more numbers with Astaire and while Allen struggles like Fontaine to hold her own with the master hoofer, Burns looks pretty smooth and comfortable dancing with Astaire. But even these movies need some kind of plot to hold it all together.

The plot here, which is the same plot in half or more of the Fred Astaire movies, is Astaire pursuing some pretty woman who may or may not like him. Then, owing to a series of mix ups, they each think the other is seeing someone else at crucial times.

Throw in some love foils, parents who get in the way, a bunch of silly contretemps and all hope is lost until a last minute save. You know, it's a Fred Astaire movie.

In A Damsel in Distress, Astaire is a successful American performer traveling in London who accidentally meets and falls in love with the daughter, Joan Fontaine, of a Lord.

That's followed by all the usual just-noted Astaire-movie confusion and mix ups. Burns and Allen were the only thing that held the movie together between the mostly good-not-great solo Astaire dance numbers, which missed a talented partner like, say, oh I don't know, Ginger Rogers.

A Damsel in Distress starts one level above farce and slowly slips until it's in full-farce mode by the last third or so. There's enough good stuff to just overcome its many weaknesses, but that's less an endorsement of the movie than of Astaire, with an earned assist to Burns and Allen.

 

[Harp]

Lazy Sunday morning sipping coffee and Lounge peruse so I'll chip this in (again):

Back in high School, Ginger Rogers was in Chicago at Water Tower Place for an appearance or some such,
cannot recall, and I tried for an autograph. She was encircled by ladies engaged in conversation,
peppering her with questions, and an opening occurred in the circle. I thought this was my moment
to act, pen and paper at the ready, but one of the ladies asked her if she had ever slept with Astaire.
I cut out quick. But GR was red faced, really caught her cold. A real dance trip up.

 

[Edward]

Tarantino's Once upon a time in Hollywood arrived (finally) on Netflix UK this week, so I watched it yesterday. Overall, I rather enjoyed it. It's one of his longer films (as they have tended to be since he parted company with his long-time editor) and it lacks the insanely-quotable quality of his early work, but all the same it hangs together well as a tale about long-term heterosexual male friendship, and a man coming to terms with, depending on how you look at it, the fall of his own star, or the possibility that he might never reach the heights of which he once thought himself capable. The whole look and feel very much captures at least a certain image of Hollywood in that period (per my own exposure to the films and media about the medium of the time). I also enjoyed the contrast between the simple life of the stuntman versus the showy life of the name star. Bruce Lee's family have apparently bitterly complained about his portrayal in it, though to me it did feel authentic to the 'Bruce Lee' media persona (whether he was different in private I'll leave to those who knew him). The pre-release "Tarantino does Manson" controversy that never quite took off is clearly overblown nonsense - it's a sideplot at best, and - I'll tell you what - I personally found it as pleasant to think of an alternative timeline that the awful Manson Family murderers didn't get to do what they did in reality as I did the idea of Hitler being gunned down a year earlier and an earlier end to the European war.

Another plus point, now I think of it: the fact that the hippies were portrayed as the outsiders they actually were at the time, not the lazy, modern distortion that paints them as the 'norm'.

 

[Zombie_61]

Tarantino's Once upon a time in Hollywood arrived (finally) on Netflix UK this week, so I watched it yesterday...it hangs together well as a tale about long-term heterosexual male friendship, and a man coming to terms with, depending on how you look at it, the fall of his own star, or the possibility that he might never reach the heights of which he once thought himself capable...

I thought Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt both played their respective sides of this relationship well--DiCaprio's Rick Dalton never once seems comfortable throughout the entire movie, while Pitt's Cliff Booth is perpetually floating through life as it comes with no apparent worries. They're two extreme sides of the same coin.

 

[Fading Fast]

Tarantino's Once upon a time in Hollywood arrived (finally) on Netflix UK this week, so I watched it yesterday. Overall, I rather enjoyed it. It's one of his longer films (as they have tended to be since he parted company with his long-time editor) and it lacks the insanely-quotable quality of his early work, but all the same it hangs together well as a tale about long-term heterosexual male friendship, and a man coming to terms with, depending on how you look at it, the fall of his own star, or the possibility that he might never reach the heights of which he once thought himself capable. The whole look and feel very much captures at least a certain image of Hollywood in that period (per my own exposure to the films and media about the medium of the time). I also enjoyed the contrast between the simple life of the stuntman versus the showy life of the name star. Bruce Lee's family have apparently bitterly complained about his portrayal in it, though to me it did feel authentic to the 'Bruce Lee' media persona (whether he was different in private I'll leave to those who knew him). The pre-release "Tarantino does Manson" controversy that never quite took off is clearly overblown nonsense - it's a sideplot at best, and - I'll tell you what - I personally found it as pleasant to think of an alternative timeline that the awful Manson Family murderers didn't get to do what they did in reality as I did the idea of Hitler being gunned down a year earlier and an earlier end to the European war.

Another plus point, now I think of it: the fact that the hippies were portrayed as the outsiders they actually were at the time, not the lazy, modern distortion that paints them as the 'norm'.

I thought Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt both played their respective sides of this relationship well--DiCaprio's Rick Dalton never once seems comfortable throughout the entire movie, while Pitt's Cliff Booth is perpetually floating through life as it comes with no apparent worries. They're two extreme sides of the same coin.

I really enjoyed this one. My comments on it here: #27475

 

[belfastboy]

"Georgetown" a rental on Prime. What a great movie. Christoph Waltz is brilliant and Redgrave great as well. A great evening's entertainment and worth the $5.99 fee.

 

[Edward]

We see some of that madness and insanity when Pitt - picking up a young female hippie hitchhiker - takes a trip out to The Manson Family ranch owned by an old friend of Pitt's, where, in one defining scene he, effectively, confronts this sadistic and crazy sleeve of the hippie culture by showing that a combination of human decency (his concern for his old friend) and a greater physical prowess (these are not peacenik hippies) easily cowed the confident-in-numbers cult. Even though you might have to turn away once or twice seeing Pitt beat-up the hippie who flattened his car's tire until said hippie agrees to change it, this is Tarantino rough justice at its best.

It is perhaps interesting that the bit of violence I cringed at was when Pitt takes out the redhead at the end. Interesting knee-jerk reaction - I was uncomfortable with that level of violence against a woman - and yet if one came at me with a knife like that, I suspect I'd get over social niceties sharpish as the survival instinct kicked in. Similarly, there was quite a lot of violence against female characters in Hateful Eight. I'm curious as to what comment QT intended there - I don't think it's a case of wilful misogyny, but some sort of other intended statement. I'm sure connect in H8 was the fact that the only sexual violence was man on man.

And, as always, Tarantino packs a lot of craziness into this scene as the Manson-DiCaprio confrontation highlights a clash of cultures: the '60s-rebellion-against-the-man culture versus traditional American values represented - quirkily - by a fading TV cowboy.

Definitely something big in the clash of media - nostalgia TV already a thing. Also to conflicted former TV star and his guilt at ending a show lots of other people were in steady work with to pursue a movie career that didn't seem (at least yet) to have quite taken off. Back in the days when movies *were* bigger than TV - a dividing line in the fame leagues that died out a decade and half ago or so now.

I did love the scene where we see into Dicaprio's fantasy about himself appearing in the Hilts role in The Great Escape - a 'what if' that in soe shape or form must have plagued many actors over the years.

Along with so much else, a few more key things to watch out for / to enjoy are the DiCaprio-Pitt friendship - best employer-personal assistant relationship since Eastwood and Freeman in Million Dollar Baby - DiCaprio's career detour (desperation move) into Spaghetti Westerns, the of-the-'60s Italian bride he brings back to LA with him who proceeds to proves that screaming - when mayhem and murder take place in your home as will happen in Tarantino's world - is a universal language and the Playboy Mansion party where handsome Steve McQueen laments losing Sharon Tate to troll-like Roman Polanski (who continues to get a pass on his MeToo behavior).

That guy they had playing Macqueen really nailed it - when the inevitable biopic comes around.... I picked up on Polanski getting a bit of a pass too, though I suspect to be fair it was partly that he was too peripheral to the story to get into it with him in that period, also that the nasty business of which he was actually convicted (and therefore would have presented no fear of a libel suit) was much later on, the film ending in 1977. I did wonder whether there was an intended hint in there that Polanski might have avoided the worst of it had Tate not been murdered.

(The Coen Bros. often fall into this trap too, but they occasionally come up with something stunningly original. So I put up with weak films like Hail, Caesar! and The Ballad of Buster Scruggs waiting for the next Inside Llewyn Davis or A Serious Man.)

I've not seen the last, but I loved all of the other three. Ballad had me roaring with laughter here and there, especially Liam Neeson singing 'The Sash Me Father Wore'. I did wonder whether the American directors were in on the joke there!

I thought Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt both played their respective sides of this relationship well--DiCaprio's Rick Dalton never once seems comfortable throughout the entire movie, while Pitt's Cliff Booth is perpetually floating through life as it comes with no apparent worries. They're two extreme sides of the same coin.

Very much so. It's interesting how one has everything material, seemingly, and isn't satisfied, while the other lives in a caravan and seems to want for nothing more than the simple life he has.

 

[Edward Reed]

Caught in the Draft (1941)
Bob Hope Dorothy Lamour

i try to end my weekend on a lighthearted note so a fun vintage comedy is what i serve up.
this one is the usual Bob Hope one liners schtik and a mindless fun story but with a life lesson and wartime morale boost. Not overly funny but good natured.

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

The other night it was Guilty Bystander (1950) with Zachary Scott and Faye Emerson. Ex-cop turned flop house detective Max Thursday is asked by his ex-wife to find their kidnapped son. Filmed mostly in NYC, it walks us through a world of mobsters, grifters, down-and-outers on the hustle, and other denizens of the edge of society. Courtesy of Eddie Miller’s Noir Alley on the TCM streaming app.

 

[Fading Fast]

The Sea Wolf from 1941 with Edward G. Robinson, Alexander Knox, John Garfield, Ida Lupino and Barry Fitzgerald


"Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven"

- John Milton Paradise Lost


How is this movie not better known? It is a gem of a psychological and philosophical drama wrapped inside a good "cruel captain commanding a ship of outcasts and criminals" story set in the early 1900s.

The Ghost, Captain Edward G. Robinson's eerie San Francisco-based clipper ship, which seems to only sail in fog, takes on an additional hand, John Garfield, wanted by the police, just before leaving port. Once at sea, it then picks up two survivors of a wreck.

One survivor is Ida Lupino, an escaped convict; the other is Alexander Knox, a well-bred urbane professional writer. Garfield, Lupino and Knox quickly realize they are on some sort of ship from hell with a captain suffering from Nietzsche's Superman complex and a crew of cowed but violent, amoral men.

Knox, in one of the best roles of his career (ditto Robinson, Lupino and Garfield), immediately butts heads with Robinson, who can size men up and find their weaknesses with frightening alacrity.

Robinson dismissively sees Knox as his opposite, a man who makes his living sitting in comfort while typing out words; whereas, Robinson successfully captains his ship using physical violence and psychological intimidation over "inferior" men.

When these two debate the world, the philosophies get muddled a bit as Nietzsche, Freud, Darwin and Christianity are all kinda mixed up and mixed in. Knox represents the "civilized" moral man who believes in honest competition and charity. Conversely, Robinson is the might-makes-right-as-the-only-way-to-survive man.

Mocking Knox's "soft hands" (foreshadowing Quint making fun of Hooper's "city-boy hands" in Jaws), Robinson tells Knox he'll be a selfish and violent man by the time the voyage is over. Knox rejoins that his beliefs and character are not that malleable.

In Robinson's book-filled cabin, Knox and he debate the morality of rule by force - Robinson proffers the famous Milton quote about reigning in Hell being preferable to serving in Heaven. Knox responds with tenets of Christian kindness, brotherhood and fair play.

These two aren't going to find common ground. While Knox and Robinson argue round after round, Knox discovers Robinson suffers from crippling headaches and bouts of temporary blindness - the latter Robinson hides from his crew.

As they sail on, Garfield repeatedly tries to thwart Robinson with physical attacks, but he loses every time. Finally, Garfield and Lupino, the latter's natural delicateness looks outright fragile on this floating den of thieves, along with Knox, ask Robinson to be put off at the next port.

Robinson, who, on the Ghost, has created his own Hell in which to reign, has no intention of letting anyone off as he tries to break all three of his new "passengers."

After seeing Robinson cruelly drive the ship's alcoholic surgeon to suicide, Garfield leads a mutiny that almost works, but incredibly, Robinson retakes command. In a brilliant move of psychological warfare, Robinson lets all the mutineers off without punishment as if to say, "you still are no threat to me."

Further pushing the psyops, he punishes his own stool pigeon who helped him break the mutiny, the ship's cook, Barry Sullivan. Sullivan plays his evil-gnome role here to the hilt. Having never seen Sullivan in anything but kindly roles - sympathetic priest, sensitive horse trainer, understanding father - his turn here as a scary, pathological sycophant to Robinson is chilling and impressive.

But Robinson's reign is threatened as a more powerful ship, captained by his brother (a fascinating thread never developed), mortally damages The Ghost. In a last grasp at cruelty, Robinson - now all but blind, yet still stunningly in control - locks Garfield in a storeroom as the ship sinks, which forces Lupino and Knox to stay on board as they try to free him.

This sets up Knox and Robinson's final encounter. With the philosophies a bit scrambled again, Robinson asserts, to the end, his might-makes-right ideology, while Knox argues for kindness and compassion.

The outcome sorta gives the nod to Knox, but Robinson's impressive finish, despite being blind on a sinking ship, and a deception Knox has to make to win, results in a less-than-total philosophical victory for Knox.

The Sea Wolf is Warner Bros. at its best. Using its top-talent, an okay budget (Jack Warner rarely fully opened up the wallet like Mayer did at MGM) and strong source material (a Jack London novel), Warners delivers a tense psychological and philosophical action-adventure movie that forces you to think while it entertains. Why this gem isn't better known today is a mystery.

 

[Harp]

Ida Lupino was an extraordinarily beautiful, charismatic, and most intelligent woman.

Her directorial skill and intellect intimidated the male animal.

 

[Fading Fast]

Ida Lupino was an extraordinarily beautiful, charismatic, and most intelligent woman.

Her directorial skill and intellect intimidated the male animal.

I'm a huge fan as she was independent and smart, plus quite good looking. To be fair, in The Sea Wolf, her role is limited - it's Robinson and Knox's movie first, Garfield and Sullivan's second and, then, Lupino's, but she shines in her scenes (as she almost always does.).

 

[Touchofevil]

"Georgetown" a rental on Prime. What a great movie. Christoph Waltz is brilliant and Redgrave great as well. A great evening's entertainment and worth the $5.99 fee.

I have found Waltz to be pretty entertaining in everything I have seen him in. At some point, I will give it a shot just because he is in it.

 

[Touchofevil]

Once again I have joined a movie midway through: His Girl Friday on TCM. I have watched it before and remember enjoying it and feel that way about it this morning. Although there is too much yelling for my liking. A nice cast and love the black and white cinematography. 81 years old, it is fun to see a version of life way back when even if it is just a film.

 

[MisterCairo]

Tarantino's Once upon a time in Hollywood arrived (finally) on Netflix UK this week, so I watched it yesterday. Overall, I rather enjoyed it. It's one of his longer films (as they have tended to be since he parted company with his long-time editor) and it lacks the insanely-quotable quality of his early work, but all the same it hangs together well as a tale about long-term heterosexual male friendship, and a man coming to terms with, depending on how you look at it, the fall of his own star, or the possibility that he might never reach the heights of which he once thought himself capable. The whole look and feel very much captures at least a certain image of Hollywood in that period (per my own exposure to the films and media about the medium of the time). I also enjoyed the contrast between the simple life of the stuntman versus the showy life of the name star. Bruce Lee's family have apparently bitterly complained about his portrayal in it, though to me it did feel authentic to the 'Bruce Lee' media persona (whether he was different in private I'll leave to those who knew him). The pre-release "Tarantino does Manson" controversy that never quite took off is clearly overblown nonsense - it's a sideplot at best, and - I'll tell you what - I personally found it as pleasant to think of an alternative timeline that the awful Manson Family murderers didn't get to do what they did in reality as I did the idea of Hitler being gunned down a year earlier and an earlier end to the European war.

Another plus point, now I think of it: the fact that the hippies were portrayed as the outsiders they actually were at the time, not the lazy, modern distortion that paints them as the 'norm'.

The only QT film I could not finish.

HATED the hour plus I could endure!

 

[MisterCairo]

La Bamba with Lou Diamond Phillips and Esai Morales. Had not seen this in about 30 years.

Good little film, relatively accurate, and just learned Valenzuela's family, including his mother who made a cameo appearance, closely followed the filming.

She died three months after the film premiered.

They asked his sister not to attend filming the scene where they board the plane. She did anyway, and broke down, begging Phillips not to board it.

Coin toss in reality happened in a dressing room, but a small thing. Also learned recently Waylon Jennings, Holly's bassist, gave up his seat for J.P. Richardson, the Big Bopper who was sick (not Valens, another film error).

Good call.

 

[Bushman]

Been on a horror movie kick for a while now. Most of them crappy b-movies from the Sci-Fi Channel I watched as a kid. They all have the same general plot as Jaws: creature attacks, sheriff wants to close the big summer attraction, mayor/rich guy says no, more attacks happen, sheriff is sent to kill creature, the end.

There were a few standouts, among them a few with a bit more of an A-list casting. One includes Deep Blue Sea. This was for me, what Jaws was for my father's generation: high budget, super scary, and spawned a series of low budget sequels nobody wants to watch. This was the shark movie that scared me out of the water as a kid. Starring big names like Samuel L Jackson, LL Cool J, and Stellan Skarsgard, it's fear factor definitely more than makes up for it's less-than-stellar plot. Genetically engineered sharks run amuck in a research facility earned this one the nickname "Jurassic Shark," and the presence of Samuel Jackson didn't hurt the reputation.

Next was Lake Placid. This star-studded creature feature ruined lakes for me like Deep Blue Sea ruined oceans. The movie stars Bridget Fonda, Bill Pullman, Brendan Gleeson, Oliver Platt, and a foul-mouthed Betty White, with creature effects by the venerable Stan Winston (who created the Terminator, the Predator, Alien Queen, and Jurassic Park dinosaurs). The movie tends towards more comedy horror than straight creature feature, with plenty of both slapstick laughs and gruesome effects. The crocodile himself is extremely realistic, as one comes to expect from Stan Winston's creatures, and Betty White is quick with the wit as ever. This is a fond, if frightening childhood favorite.

Next was a series of aforementioned Sci-Fi Channel Originals, including Boa, Python, Snakehead Terror, Sabertooth, Bats, and Bats 2: Human Harvest. The story and acting in Boa isn't particularly awful even if the creature effects are. It's not bad for an early 2000s tv movie. Not great either. Python is more of a spoof on the genre, same with Snakehead Terror and Bats 2. The first Bats isn't bad, but again, tv movie but starring Lou Diamond Phillips. The soundtrack is amazingly the most memorable part of Bats. Sabretooth doesn't have bad effects, but it's more memorable for its semi-unique plot (resurrected Smilodon fatalis escapes lab and goes on killing spree), and the fact that it stars John-Rhys Davies (of Raiders of the Lost Ark and Lord of the Rings fame) and David Keith.

After that, I binged some Bigfoot movies, which is a subgenre of creature features I've never really gotten into before. Line up included Big Legend, Primal Rage, The Hunting Grounds, and Abominable. Most of them weren't that great, but there were a few exceptions. Big Legend was beautiful shot somewhere in the PNW in one of the more northerly Redwood parks, and the acting wasn't half bad. The real disappointment came at the end, when it revealed it was just a movie made to set up a TV series that never happened, leaving it on a major cliff hanger. Primal Rage was another good one, also beautifully shot right in the heart of the Prairie Creek Redwoods. The characters were scummy, but the acting and creature effects were good. Definitely one of the better Bigfoot movies. The other two I had to struggle to pay attention to. They were pretty awful all around.

Spent most of Sunday watching the 3hr 1990 TV movie version of It. This is the one that scared me away from uncovered shower drains as a kid. Definitely a classic. I planned to watch the remake of Part 1 and 2 back to back, but couldn't find Part 2 for free, so I turned Fear Street: 1994 and 1978. 1994 seemed to have a bit of a Scream (1996) quality about it: teen killer murders fellow teens while dressed in a black cloaked Halloween costume. It's mostly responsible for introducing us to this R.L. Stine created universe, and setting up Part II, set in 1978. That one is more fun. Set at summer camp, Camp Nightwing, we begin to learn a little more about the witch possessing the town of Shadyside. This movie is loaded with classic slasher shout outs, and is a real treat to watch. Especially because the costume design for the Camp Nightwing killer is so good: Mackinaw jacket, logger boots, and an old potato sack mask! Anybody who is a fan of the Jason movies will recognize that last one as a callout to Friday the 13th: Part II.

Yesterday I set aside for grotesque cannibal killers. Watched the 2006 Texas Chainsaw prequel, and the 2003 remake back to back before diving into the 1974 original! I think what works about the prequel and remake is that they're narratively different to justify being part of the original movie's timeline. The Hewitt family of the remake timeline are just all around grotesque. Moreso even than the Sawyer family of the original movie. They live pigly, they act pigly, they're just all around nasty people. The Sawyers are crazy, deranged cannibals, but you could still believe they existed within a society. Speaking of pigly, nasty people, I finished off yesterday with House of 1,000 Corpses. I've given my thoughts on this one before. It's the most avante garde of Zombie's movies, but perhaps one of his better ones too. It's like a buffet of the weird and the strange.

Making today a Stephen King day. Started off with Kubrick's infamous The Shining. Still the freakiest movie I've ever seen. Currently on Doctor Sleep now. I love how well Doctor Sleep matches up to the original Kubrick movie. It's well casted, well acted, and well made. Gonna try to get in Cujo, Chicldren of the Corn, and maybe Pet Sematary if I can find the time.

 

[Touchofevil]

The only QT film I could not finish.

HATED the hour plus I could endure!

We did not finish it either although I plan on doing so one day.

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

The Harder They Fall (1956) with Humphrey Bogart. A look at the dark side of boxing. Rod Steiger is the brutal promoter who will stop at nothing to make a crooked buck. Via TCM app.